Grub Stake.

Lilly said:
I also think that if the grant is to be given then it should be given earlier on in pregnancy but not too early i.e not at confirmation of pregnancy stage. Not a nice thing to think about, I know, but many pregnancies do end in early miscarriage (before 12 weeks) so the grant would be given and then not be able to be used for the purpose which it was intended for. I know that miscarriage is always a possibility but after 12 weeks there is a significant drop in the likelihood of this and yet it's still early enough to make a difference through healthy eating so maybe they could give people the grant at around the 12 week mark.
Could they not also make them only redeemable against healthy food like fruit, veg, etc and prevent people from getting beer and fags with them?:confused:
Click to expand...
If vouchers were given on a weekly or monthly basis upon confirmation of pregnancy Lily, should a miscarriage occur they would be discontinued.

Of course a fairer distribution of the country’s wealth would remove the need for a grant in the first place.
 
Busman747 said:
It is estimated that this "vote earner" will cost US as tax payers £80,000,000 each year........

If it is so important, why is the scheme not being introduced until 2009?
Click to expand...
Because if the scheme were started now by the time that the next election comes along people will have forgotten about it.

It’s just a cynical ploy to try and buy votes.
 
beechy said:
id rather see two hundred pounds go
to the elder citizens those who more deserve and
who would appreciate
Click to expand...


There is just as much chance of the elder end of the population spending it on fags and booze than pregnant women. You cant tar everyone with the same brush. How can we say who deserves it the most??
 
lancsdave said:
Simple answer is no because we have retailers who will quite happily abuse any system in this country just as much as the person receiving the vouchers. A voucher is money in the till, they don't care what it is for.
Click to expand...
My experience is that supermarkets will only accept vouchers for the goods that they are intended for so buying fags and booze with them is a no, no in supermarkets.

Of course there is nothing to stop a voucher being sold to a neighbour who will then use them for the purpose that they were intended for. And as you point out there are smaller retailers who see the voucher as cash in the till and will accept them for any goods. But how many of them have decent range of fruit and veg?

If I remember correctly many years ago when child allownace was paid via a book at the post office, people had to produce the book to use the milk token to get their child’s free milk.
 
lol its a womans perogative to change her mind JB ;) no seriously after reading everything that everyones put, they make sense more than i do, i was referring to the voucher system for the people on the social when i said its a load of rubbish JB
 
I think it's a daft idea.

Just one point though - I think it's £120 not £200 as was reported earlier.

Any mother who is eating healthily will do so with or without that money. Anyone else will see it as a windfall and buy more fags and booze. I do not believe that it will make one jot of difference apart from the fact that the government will spend our well earned money on it and not on the things that really matter.

I thought Gordon Brown was sensible, this seems to be ridiculous.
 
[email protected] said:
There already is a scheme for those on income support etc
Free milk, infant formula, vitamins, fruit and vegetables factsheet : Directgov - Parents

When I was pregnant mid 60s 'welfare foods' applied to all pregnant women even though working. I got milk, iron capsules and concentrated orange juice.

Since the admin of a scheme exists it would be more prudent to extend it, rather than just chuck money out - which would be subject to misuse.
Click to expand...


the free milk and baby formula has been going on for years
 
Claire Cal said:
There is just as much chance of the elder end of the population spending it on fags and booze than pregnant women. You cant tar everyone with the same brush. How can we say who deserves it the most??
Click to expand...
Very true.

The real answer is to make sure that the country’s wealth is distributed more fairly then there would be no need for such schemes.

I have heard it stated at 20% of the population gains 80% of the created wealth. Those receiving telephone number salaries get regular increases as a percentage, which is way over and above the rate of inflation whilst the 80% get an inflation rate increase spread over two years.
 
jambutty said:
Those receiving telephone number salaries get regular increases as a percentage, which is way over and above the rate of inflation whilst the 80% get an inflation rate increase spread over two years.
Click to expand...

Or, if you work in the public services you get a payrise below the rate of inflation which is given in 2 stages. Although meant to start in April, nurses, midwives and professions allied to medicine, in England,have so far received sweet Fanny Adams.:(
 
Just read a comment in todays paper about this. A young woman was saying that her mum had just been diagnosed with ovarian cancer and had been advised to eat certain fruits and vegetables to help in her recovery. As the young woman asked will her mum be offered this extra money? Her last point being that pregnancy is a choice, cancer is not!!
 
Seems like a good idea, altho' I do agree with those who suggest it should be "means tested" ... I am assuming that this is what we refer to as "geared to income." Canada has no national policy on this issue, altho' there is a mothers allowance cheque which goes out every month to all Canadians who have kids under 18. Provincial govts. have their own programs usually offered thro' municipalities. In Kingston we have a program called Better Beginnings for Kingston Children. Expectant mothers are offered free pre natal clinics and seminars, followed up with parenting classes after the child is born. They are given food packages, no money just food. But the programs are free, and those who attend are given taxi vouchers so that they can make it to the classes. There is a central facility, but satellite sites are set up in the poorer areas of town. And there are summer camps for kids. Not an ideal system, but it does some good.
 
I think this system would be abused by some but agree if it was to come in surely it would be more beneficial from the start of the pregnancy.
 
theres no way any body is going to spend a whole 200 pound on eat heatlthily... im pregnant myself and eating ealthily is obviously a huge deal to any pregnant woman but i know if i was to get the money i wouldnt spend it all on healthy food if i did the food wouldnt last very long would it
 
a better idea would be to spread the money out over the period of the pregnancy... there are available coupons for 2.80 a week for fruit and vegetables for pregnant women but i dont think 2.80 is enough really
 
Why can't the pregnant woman manage to do that herself? Just because she gets £200 all at once doesn't mean she has to spend it all at once.
 
What happened to personal responsibility? I sometimes despair of the land of my birth. Are you all so steeped now in the government handout? Not that we don't have a fair amount of that over here. So corrosive.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top